Phil - Forest and Wildlife Development

Ph|L|PP|NE ENV|R0NHENTAL C0VERNAN6E 2 PR0JE6T (E60C0V 2}
Philippine Forest and Wildlife Law Enforcement

Situationer and Core Issues
The EcoGov 2 Project is an initiative of the Government of the Philippines, implemented in partnership with the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Department of the nterior and Local Government, local government
units and other stakeholders, funded by the United States Agency for nternational Development and managed by
Development Alternatives, nc. and its subcontractors:
Cesar Virata & Associates, nc.
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Emerging Markets
The Marine Environment and Resources Foundation, nc.
The Media Network
Orient ntegrated Development Consultants, nc.
Resources, Environment and Economics Center for Studies, nc.
March 12, 2007
This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for nternational
Development. t was prepared by Development Alternatives, nc.

PHILIPPINE FOREST AND
WILDLIFE LAW
ENFORCEMENT:

Situationer and Core Issues

Prepared by Roberto V. Oliva, Forest Law Enforcement Specialist

DISCLAMER

The authors views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the
views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United
States Government.

Table of Contents

ACRONYMS ................................................................................................III
FOREST LAW ENFORCEMENT ........................................ 1
I. THE FORESTRY SECTOR........................................................................ 3
II. OVERVIEW OF FOREST MANAGEMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES ............. 4
A. Legal Framework................................................................................... 4
B. Agencies Tasked with Forest Management .......................................... 5
C. Major Forestry Laws .............................................................................. 6
III. ISSUES IN FOREST MANAGEMENT ..................................................... 7
A. Non Demarcation of Forest Boundaries ................................................ 7
B. Need for More Accurate Workable Definition on the Modes of
Development and Utilization of Forest Resources ................................ 7
C. Non-implementation of the LGC Provision on LGU Share in
National Wealth...................................................................................... 9
D. Non-implementation of the Rewards to Informers under PD 705.......... 9
E. Issuance of Tax Declarations Inside Forest Lands.............................. 10
IV. FOREST LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES......................... 11
A. The Law on Illegal Logging.................................................................. 11
B. Law on kaingin..................................................................................... 12
C. Role of Government Agencies and Tenure Holders in Forest
Law Enforcement................................................................................. 12
D. Community partnership in forest law enforcement.............................. 14
E. Present initiatives in forest protection.................................................. 15
V. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE FOREST LAW
ENFORCEMENT.................................................................................. 16
A. Strengthen DENR Forest Law Enforcement Capability....................... 16
B. Strengthen MPFCs and Partnership with Other Sectors..................... 17
C. Strengthen and Institutionalize LGU Involvement in Forest Law
Enforcement......................................................................................... 17
D. Give Tenure Holders Due Process Prior to Suspension or
Revocation........................................................................................... 17
VI. DENRLGUCOMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP: CASE OF WAO,
LANAO DEL SUR ................................................................................ 19
WILDLIFE PROTECTION................................................. 21
I. THE PHILIPPINES AS A MEGADIVERSE COUNTRY AND HOTSPOT
AREA.................................................................................................. 23
II. LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR WILDLIFE PROTECTION ......................... 24
A. Constitution: State ownership of wildlife resources ............................. 24
B. National Laws Protecting Wildlife........................................................ 24
C. International Cooperation and Agreements......................................... 25
PHILIPPINE FOREST ANDWILDLIFE LAWENFORCEMENT: SITUATIONER AND CORE ISSUES i

III. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
RA 9147............................................................................................. 26
A. Recent Initiatives in the Implementation of RA 9147.......................... 26
V. ISSUES AND CONCERNS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF RA 9147 ...... 27
A. Education............................................................................................. 27
B. Engineering.......................................................................................... 27
C. Enforcement......................................................................................... 28
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS TO STRENGTHEN WILDLIFE PROTECTION... 29
REFERENCES............................................................................................. 30

ii THE PHILIPPINE ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE 2PROJECT

ACRONYMS

ARMM - Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao
CBFM - Community-Based Forest Management
CENRO - Community Environment and Natural Resources Office
DAO - Department Administrative Order
DENR - Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DILG - Department of the Interior and Local Government
DOJ - Department of J ustice
EcoGov - Philippine Environmental Governance Project
EO - Executive Order
FLEG - Forest Law Enforcement Group
GPOA - General Program of Action
IBP - Integrated Bar of the Philippines
IFMA - Industrial Forest Management Agreement
IPRA - Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
J MC - J oint Memorandum Circular
LGC - Local Government Code
LGU - Local Government Unit
MENRO - Municipal Environment and Natural Resources Office
MFPC - Multisectoral Forest Protection Committee
NEAT - National Environmental Action Team
NIPAS - National Integrated Protected Area System
PD - Presidential Decree
PEDO - Police Environmental Desk Officer
PNOC - Philippine National Oil Company
PO - Peoples Organization
RA - Republic Act
SIFMA - Socialized Industrial Forest Management Agreement
TLA - Timber License Agreement
TWG - Technical Working Group
UPLB - University of the Philippines Los Baos
USAID - United States Agency for International Development
PHILIPPINE FOREST ANDWILDLIFE LAWENFORCEMENT: SITUATIONER AND CORE ISSUES iii

iv THE PHILIPPINE ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE 2PROJECT

FOREST LAW ENFORCEMENT

PHILIPPINE FOREST ANDWILDLIFE LAWENFORCEMENT: SITUATIONER AND CORE ISSUES 1

2 THE PHILIPPINE ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE 2PROJECT

I. THE FORESTRY SECTOR

The Philippines is one of the 18 mega diverse countries in the world.

The country has more than 52,170 described species,
about half of which are found nowhere else in the world.
Studies show that on a per unit area basis, the
Philippines is the top mega diversity country. However,
unsustainable logging operations and illegal timber trade
continue to pose serious threats to the countrys species
richness. In 1917, the country still had 17 million ha, or
more than 50% of her 30 million ha land area. Today, the
latest estimate shows that only about 7.168 million ha of
Philippine forests remain (Philippine Forestry Statistics,
2003).

In the 60s and 70s the forestry sector was a major
contributor to the countrys economy. The Master Plan
for Forestry Development of the Philippines (1991)
indicated that for almost two decades, agriculture,
logging, mining and fisheries together contributed annual
almost P15 billion to the countrys gross value added. Although this was
almost doubled in 1988 (P25 billion), the share of forestry and logging
dramatically plummeted from 12.5% in 1970 to only about 2.3% in 1988.

In the 2003 Annual Report of DENR, it was reported that the
Philippinesfrom being a major tropical timber exporter up to the 70s
has become a net importer of forest products (65%-70% of wood
requirements).

About 18-20 million Filipinos live in the uplands under abject poverty.

II. OVERVIEW OF FOREST MANAGEMENT
IN THE PHILIPPINES

A. LEGAL FRAMEWORK

State ownership of natural resources

This is contained in Article XII, Sec. 2 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution,
thus: all lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum
and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or
timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by
the State. With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural
resources shall not be alienated.

Accordingly, the exploration, development, and utilization of natural
resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The
State may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-
production, joint venture, or production sharing agreements with Filipino
citizens or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose
capital is owned by such citizens.

Two major classification of forest Lands

The first are the protection forests. These are the protected areas and the
proclaimed watersheds. They are called set-asides or protection forests
because they have been legislated or proclaimed for the public good.
Their primary purpose is for preservation and biodiversity conservation.
They fall under the general category of national parks under Article XII,
Sec. 3 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

The second are the production forests. These forests are to be
sustainably managed primarily for the utilization of the resources therein
such as timber and non-timber forest products. In the 1987 Constitution,
they fall under the category of forest or timber lands.


B. AGENCIES TASKED WITH FOREST MANAGEMENT

DENR as primary agency

DENR is the primary government agency responsible for the
conservation, management, development and proper use of the countrys
environment and natural resources as well as the licensing and regulation
of all natural resources (EO 192, 1987).

LGUs as partners / co-managers

Under RA 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991), local government
units (LGUs) shall share with national government the responsibility in the
management and maintenance of ecological balance within their territorial
jurisdiction.

Section 17 of the LGC went on to devolved certain forest management
functions to LGUs, such as enforcement of forestry laws in community
based forestry projects, integrated social forestry programs and
communal forests, subject to supervision, control and review of the
DENR.

In 1998, DENR and DILG issued J oint Memorandum Circular No. 98-01
entitled Manual of Procedures for DENR-DILG-LGU Partnership on
Devolved and Other Forest Management Functions.

In 2003, in an effort to strengthen the partnership, DENR-DILG issued
J oint Memorandum Circular No. 2003-01 entitled Strengthening the
DENR-DILG-LGU Partnership on Devolved and Other Forest
Management Functions.

Other agencies having jurisdiction over forest lands

By virtue of other laws and Presidential Proclamations, other agencies
have also been given jurisdiction and management over certain forest
areas such as UP with respect to Mt. Makiling (RA 6967, 1989) and
PNOC over Tiwi Geothermal, Tongonan and Palimpinon watershed areas
(PD 1515).

In the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, management of the
forest lands is entrusted to the ARMM government.


C. MAJOR FORESTRY LAWS

The principal law governing forest management in the country is PD 705
(1975) otherwise known as the Revised Forestry Code of the
Philippines. The Code contains basic forestry standards and practices
such as areas needed for forestry, multiple use, forest utilization and
management, and criminal offenses and penalties. PD 705 has been
amended by PD 865, PD 1559, PD 1775, BP 83, RA 7161 and EO 277.

Another important law in forestry is RA 7586 (1992) or the National
Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS). This is the principal law
governing set asides or protected areas. NIPAS encompasses
outstanding remarkable areas and biologically important public lands that
are habitats of rare and endangered species of plants and animals,
biogeographic zones and related ecosystems, all of which are designated
as protected areas. The protected areas include strict and nature reserve,
natural monument, wildlife sanctuary, protected landscapes and
seascapes, resource reserve and natural biotic areas.

RA 8371 (1997) or the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) will also
have great impact on forest management. Other laws include RA 9072
(2001) or the National Cave and Resources Management and Protection
Act, RA 9147 (2001) Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection
Act, and RA 9175 The Chainsaw Act.


III. ISSUES IN FOREST MANAGEMENT

A. NON DEMARCATION OF FOREST BOUNDARIES

Earlier, we have discussed the two major classifications of forest lands-
that of set-asides or protection forests and production forests. Knowing
the classification and boundaries on the ground is very important as
management and activities will depend on what kind of forest is being
managed.

Unfortunately, the metes and bounds of the forest lines have not been
delimited. This despite Article XII, Sec. 4 of the 1987 Philippine
Constitution which states: The Congress shall as soon as possible,
determine by law the specific limits of forest lands and national parks,
marking clearly their boundaries on the ground. Thereafter, such forest
lands and national parks shall be conserved and may not be increased
nor diminished, except by law. The Congress shall provide, for such
period as it may determine measures to prohibit logging in endangered
forests and watershed areas.

For the past several years, DENR has launched several reforestation
activities supported by Overseas Development Assistance. DENR had
encouraged the use of fast growing species and had promised the
communities the chance to harvest the same. Many of the trees planted
are now mature, and the communities who planted them would like to
harvest. The DENR would not allow because the area is a critical
watershed, a fact they have belatedly learn.

B. NEED FOR MORE ACCURATE WORKABLE DEFINITION
ON THE MODES OF DEVELOPMENT AND UTILIZATION OF
FOREST RESOURCES

Prior to the 1987 Constitution, the modes of access to natural resources
management was either through a lease, license agreement or permit. In
other words, the government issues the permit, and in return, the logging
company pays only fees and other charges, keeping for itself the
enormous profits from the utilization of the natural resources.

For example, for so many years, the forest charge for almaciga, lauan,
tanguile or premium hardwood harvested was only P30.00 per cubic

meter, while the company was able to sell the same for about P2,000.00
P3,000.00 per cubic meter. No wonder, timber concessionaires became
so rich. Their goal was to cut more and export more. At the expense of
our natural resources! It was only with the passage of RA 7161 (Forest
Charges law, 1991) that forest charges were increased.

Be that as it may, the 1987 Constitution has so wisely moved away from
the lease, license or permit system. Now, development and utilization of
natural resources can only be done directly by the State, or through co-
production, joint venture or production sharing agreements. The shift is
obviously to ensure that the State is able to get a fair return on the
utilization of natural resources. Unfortunately, there is as yet no working
definition on what is the share of the government in joint venture, co-
production or production sharing agreements in forest products utilization.

For example, under DENR DAO 96-29, CBFM is a production sharing
agreement which is designed to ensure that participating community shall
enjoy the benefits of sustainable utilization, management and
conservation of forest lands and natural resources therein. The
government share in these benefits in the form of increased natural
resource protection and rehabilitation, forest charges, fees and/or taxes
as determined and agreed upon.

In the case of IFMA, according to regulations the sharing of the profit
between the holder thereof and the government shall be negotiated
between the said holder and the DENR immediately following the
approval of the CDMP and the grant of ECC, taking into consideration,
among others, the following cost factors:

plantation establishment, management, infrastructure and
harvesting costs as well as mitigation measures;

fixed assets, equipment and machines directly related to
plantation development and harvests;

kind and volume or products that shall be harvested and prevailing
fair market price thereof;

variation in the rates of interests and foreign exchange for
financial investments;

expenses incurred in indirect activities such as community
development, etc.;

forest charges and taxes paid; and

reasonable margin for profit and risks.


From the enumeration, the government may end up owing the IFMA
holder! In any case, capturing the true value of the forests has been
elusive as yet.

C. NON-IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LGC PROVISION ON
LGU SHARE IN NATIONAL WEALTH

Aside from mandating LGUs to share with the national government the
responsibility in the maintenance of ecological balance within their
territorial jurisdiction, the LGC also gives to LGUs the right to share in the
national wealth. The provision under RA7160 thus states:

Sec. 289. Share in the Proceeds from the Development and Utilization
of national Wealth. Local government units shall have an equitable
share in the proceeds derived from the utilization and development of the
national wealth within their respective areas, including sharing the same
with the inhabitants by way of direct benefits.

Sec. 290. Amount of Share of Local Government Units. Local
government units shall, in addition to the internal revenue allotment, have
a share of forty percent (40%) of the gross collection derived by the
national government from the preceding fiscal year from mining taxes,
royalties, forestry and fishery charges, and other taxes, fees, or charges,
including related surcharges, interests or fines, and from its share in any
co-production, joint venture or production sharing agreement in the
utilization and development of the national wealth within their territorial
jurisdiction.

In forestry, LGUs share in the national wealth is limited to the forest
charges collected in timber harvesting of natural forests.

Although, there are many LGUs who are committed to good
environmental governance, many LGUs feel that natural resources
management and protection are cost centers. Many are therefore
reluctant to participate actively.

D. NON-IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REWARDS TO
INFORMERS UNDER PD 705

The provision reads:

Sec. 78-B Rewards to informants. Any person who shall provide any
information leading to the apprehension and conviction of any offender for
any violation of this Code or other forest laws, rules and regulations, or
confiscation of forest products, shall be given a reward in the amount of

twenty per centum (20%) of the proceeds of the confiscated forest
products.

The law is quite clear. Unfortunately this has not been implemented by
DENR for quite sometime now.

E. ISSUANCE OF TAX DECLARATIONS INSIDE FOREST
LANDS

As stated by the Constitution, with the exception of alienable and
disposable lands, all natural resources can not be alienated. Thus, in a
long line of cases, the Supreme Court has ruled that titles issued inside
forest lands are void from the beginning, as even long, adverse and
continuous possessions of these forest lands do not ripen into ownership.

While this principle is quite clear, the reversion process is very slow. It is
common knowledge that there are many forest lands where titles have
been issued.

Aside from anomalous titles obtaining in forest lands, another issue which
affects forest management and leads to conversion of forest lands into
other uses is the practice of LGUs in issuing tax declarations inside forest
lands. Accordingly, not for the forest lands but for the growing crops
therein. Although tax declarations are not evidence of ownership,
possessions of tax declarations especially in the rural areas are treated
almost as evidence of ownership. If tax declarations involving growing
trees/crops in forest lands are issued, transfers of the same are often
made, and after a little while, the use of the land becomes agricultural or
residential.

This, despite Sec. 85 of PD 705 as amended which reads:

Sec. 85 Tax Declaration on Real Property.

Imprisonment for a period of not less than two (2) nor more than four (4)
years and perpetual disqualification from holding an elective or appointive
office, shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee who shall
issue a tax declaration on real property, without a certification from the
Director of the Forest Development and Director of Lands or their duly
designated representatives that area declared for taxation purposes is
alienable and disposable lands, unless the land is titled or has been
occupied and possessed by members of the national cultural minorities
prior to J uly 4, 1955.


IV. FOREST LAW ENFORCEMENT
IN THE PHILIPPINES

A. THE LAW ON ILLEGAL LOGGING

Section 68 of PD 705 as amended by Executive Order No. 277 (1987) is
the law governing illegal logging. It provides:

Sec. 68. Cutting, Gathering and/or Collecting Timber, or Other Forest
Products Without License. Any person who shall cut, gather, collect, or
remove timber or other forest products from any forest land, or timber
from any forest land, or timber from alienable and disposable public land,
or from private land, without any authority, or possess timber or other
forest products without the legal documents as required under
existing forest laws and regulations, shall be punished with the penalties
imposed under Article 309 and 310 of the Revised Penal Code: Provided,
that in case of partnerships, associations, or
corporations, the officers who ordered the
cutting, gathering, collection or possession
shall be liable, and if such officers are
aliens, they shall, in addition to the penalty,
be deported without further proceedings on
the part of the Commission on Immigration
and Deportation.

The Court shall further order the
confiscation in favor of the government of
the timber or any forest products cut,
gathered, collected, removed, or possessed, as well as the machinery,
equipment, implements and tools illegally used in the area where the
timber or forest products are found.

Sec. 68 A. Administrative Authority of the Department Head or His
Duly Authorized Representative to Order Confiscation. In all cases of
violations of this Code or other forest laws, rules and regulations, the
Department Head or his duly authorized representative, may order the
confiscation of any forest products illegally cut, gathered, removed, or
possessed or abandoned, and all conveyances used either by land, water
or air in the commission of the offense and to dispose of the same in
accordance with pertinent laws, regulations or policies on the matter.


Prior to EO 277, prosecution of illegal logging cases was difficult. The
State has to prove beyond reasonable doubt the various elements of the
crime such as the cutting, gathering, collecting, or removing timber from
forest lands or from alienable and disposable land. In EO 277, mere
possession of timber or forest products, without the legal documents
consummates the crime of illegal logging.

Likewise, EO 277 has authorized the DENR to conduct administrative
confiscation proceedings in illegal logging cases. In the case of Paat vs.
Court of Appeals (1997), the Supreme Court has occasioned to rule that
when an administrative confiscation has been initiated by DENR, the
courts can no longer issue replevins, until such time that the
administrative proceedings are terminated. This has somehow cured the
exasperating experience before of DENR forest officers who, risking lives
and limb proceed with the detection, apprehension and seizure of forest
products or timber, only for these timber and forest products to be
released through the remedy of replevin. .

B. LAW ON KAINGIN

Sec. 78 of PD 705, as amended, is the law on
unlawful occupation or destruction of forest lands and
grazing lands. The law penalizes any person who
enters and occupies or possesses, or makes kaingin
for his own private use or for others, any forest land
or grazing land without authority.

C. ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND TENURE
HOLDERS IN FOREST LAW ENFORCEMENT

DENR

Under Section 5 (k) of EO 192, DENR shall assume responsibility for
the assessment, development, protection, conservation, licensing, and
regulation as provided for by law, where applicable, of all natural
resources; the regulation and monitoring of service contractors, licensees,
lessees, and permittees for the extraction, exploration, development and
utilization of natural resources products.

LGUs

Under RA 7160 the following are the powers of LGUs:


General:

To share with national government the responsibility in the
management and maintenance of ecological balance within their
territorial jurisdiction.

Specific:

For Cities and Municipalities

Pursuant to national policies and subject to supervision,
control and review of the DENR, implementation of community
based forestry projects which include integrated social forestry
programs and similar projects; management and control of
communal forests with an area not exceeding fifty (50) square
kilometers; establishment of tree parks, greenbelts, and similar
forest development projects.

For Provinces

Pursuant to national policies and subject to supervision,
control and review of the DENR, enforcement of forestry laws
limited to community-based forestry projects, pollution control
law, small scale mining law, and other laws on the protection
of the environment; and mini-hydro electric projects for local
purposes.

From the above reading, one will note that many forestry
projects should have been devolved to cities and
municipalities while forest law enforcement in community
based projects should have been the responsibility of
provinces. Unfortunately, fifteen years after RA 7160 was
passed, devolution of forestry projects, even under
supervision, review and control of the DENR has not
materialized, and no province as yet has been chiefly in
charge of forest law enforcement in community based projects.

DENRDILG J oint Memorandum Circulars 98-01 and 2003-01
were issued to implement the devolution and to form and
strengthen the partnership between DENR and the LGUs.
Unfortunately, the devolution and partnerships have not been
fully implemented on the ground.

Other agencies having jurisdiction over forest lands

As jurisdictions have been conferred by law to these agencies
(UPLB, ARMM, National Power Corporation and others),
management and control of these forest lands are within their
responsibilities. Unfortunately, there are reports on various
occasions to the effect that illegal logging and other forest
destruction occur in such areas.

Tenure Holders

Tenure holders are given long term access rights to forest
lands usually for 25 years, renewable for another 25 years.

One of the major responsibilities of tenure holders in forest
lands such as (TLAs, IFMA, CBFM, SIFMA) is to manage and
protect their respective areas. In the case of TLAs and IFMA
holders, they are even required to employ professional
foresters.

In the case of CBFM, Peoples Organizations (POs) are given
the privilege to occupy, possess, utilize and develop
forestlands and its resources and to be entitled and to the
sustainable utilization of forest resources within their areas,
but with corresponding obligation to protect their areas.

D. COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP IN FOREST LAW
ENFORCEMENT

The Multisectoral Forest Protection Committee (MFPC), is a product of
the World Bank assisted ENR-SECAL Program. As the term implies,
MFPCs are composed of membership from various sectors of society
such as the church, youth, academe, police, media, women, military,
DENR, LGU, NGOs and other groups and has for its primary objective the
assistance to DENR in the fight against illegal logging.

From an initial target of 15 MFPCs in 1992, the program expanded to
cover all regions, provinces and municipalities. In 1995 and 1996, DENR
issued DAOs 95-17 and 96-39 Institutionalizing the MFPC within the
DENR system.

PEDO

Recently, the DILG through Secretary Angelo Reyes established a Police
Environmental Desk Officer in every police station.

IBP

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines, through its National Environmental
Action Team (NEAT) has likewise committed itself in the assisting the
government in environmental law enforcement.


Designating Special Prosecutors and Courts to Handle Illegal
Logging Cases

The DOJ and the Supreme Court has designated special prosecutors and
courts to handle cases of illegal logging.

E. PRESENT INITIATIVES IN FOREST PROTECTION

General Program of Action (GPOA) of the DENR

In its 10 point program as stated in the GPOA, the DENR has identified
Enforcement of environmental rules and natural resources regulations
as its number one priority. This include programs and projects on anti-
illegal logging operations, protection from fire, pest and diseases,
encroachment and illegal resource extraction, resolution of land cases,
conflicts and fake titles and wildlife enforcement.

Forest Law Enforcement Group (FLEG) Program

The FLEG is a World Bank assisted program designed to curb illegal
timber trade East Asia. It had its Customs and Law Enforcement
Workshop last November 28-30, 2006 in Cebu City.

Criteria and Indicators under the International Timber
Organization

The C & I Project of the ITTO is designed to measure sustainable forest
management in the field. Changes in forest cover and other forestry
activities are measured on a regular basis.

EcoGov 2 under USAID

EcoGov 2, through its forestry component, is also involved in forest law
enforcement.


V. ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TO IMPROVE FOREST LAW
ENFORCEMENT

A. STRENGTHEN DENR FOREST LAW ENFORCEMENT
CAPABILITY

From interviews, the following have been identified as factors affecting
DENRs effectiveness in forest law enforcement:

Absence of unified environmental law enforcement
mechanism.

Accordingly, while DENR has major concerns such as forestry,
mining, environment and clean air, environmental law
enforcement is fragmented.

Lack of resources

DENRs budget has actually declined during the last five
years. Presently, each forest guard is still guarding 4,000 ha
with a measly P50.00P100.00 traveling allowance per month.

Lack of DENRs surveillance equipment

Since forest areas are far flung, DENR needs effective
surveillance equipment such as helicopters and small planes.

Weak DENR Legal Support

To strengthen the DENR Legal Service will include training,
computerization of the legal department and incentive
schemes for lawyers to enter and stay in the DENR.

Lack of the Forest Management Bureaus involvement forest
law enforcement

While FMB has become a staff Bureau, its personnel to
include its lawyers may be used for forest law enforcement
operations.


B. STRENGTHEN MPFCS AND PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHER
SECTORS

The MFPCs have proved to be cost effective partner of the DENR in
forest protection. To a large extent, MFPCs have been credited to be
responsible in the dismantling of big time illegal logging in Regions 2, 4,
8, 9, 10 and 11 in the early 90s. This is because if the selection process
for MFPC members is followed, the MFPCs bring to the fore of forest
protection the stature and commitment of its members. DENR must
remember however that MFPC members are just volunteers and it is
incumbent for the DENR to provide the necessary logistics, leadership
and most specially commitment.

C. STRENGTHEN AND INSTITUTIONALIZE LGU INVOLVE-
MENT IN FOREST LAW ENFORCEMENT

The laws (RA 7160) and regulations (DENR-DILG J MCs 9801 and
200301) on devolution of forest management functions to LGUs and
partnership with DENR are already in place. Unfortunately, LGU
involvement in forest management and forest law enforcement is still
isolated. These are usually in places where there are foreign assisted
projects or where the LGUs themselves are environmental champions.

It is important to note however that the LGUs are among the real
stakeholders of the forests since they are already in said areas. Given the
existing laws and regulations, the corporate powers of LGUs, involving
them in forest management and forest law enforcement will definitely be a
big boost to forest law enforcement.

In fact, an interesting policy issue would be to allow the LGUs to be given
the opportunity to invest in forest plantations.

D. GIVE TENURE HOLDERS DUE PROCESS PRIOR TO
SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION

Another major issue in forest law enforcement is the practice of DENR to
suspend validly issued tenure instruments or rights arising there from
without due process.

In various forums, the wood industry has complained about their difficulty
in investing in forestry as they fear that DENR without due process would
suspend or cancel their operations. Of late, the CBFM program has been
much affected because the DENR has suspended the issuance of
resource use permits of the entire program on the findings that some POs

have violated their tenure instruments. The suspensions however came
about without affording due process to the tenure holders.

Aside from its negative impacts on the program itself (IFMA, SIFMA,
CBFM), this situation is inimical to forest law enforcement as when the
areas become open access, then the forest area will be subject to timber
poaching and other illegal forestry activities.


VI. DENRLGUCOMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP:
CASE OF WAO, LANAO DEL SUR

Wao is a municipality in Lanao del Sur under the Autonomous Region in
Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).

Prior to 2002, illegal logging was rampant.
The ARMM DENR office was far from the
municipality, and the LGU did not know
what to do. The other sectors of the
community did not like what was
happening and resorted to name calling
and blaming the DENR ARMM and the
local government.

It was at this juncture that the USAID
assisted project mobilized the DENR, the
LGU and the other stakeholders. After
heated exchanges during the initial
meetings, the DENR, the LGUs and the
community agreed to join hands and chart the future of their forest lands.

The Technical Working Group (TWG) composed of the LGU, the DENR
and other sectors of the community went on to prepare the municipalitys
forest land use plan. The FLUP provided the basis for closing open-
access areas in Wao and identified the ways of protecting its more than
12,000 ha of forest cover (natural and planted). The town has seven
watersheds, six of which are critically threatened by illegal logging.

Wao, through its Sangguniang Bayan and Mayor provided the necessary
funds for the FLUP and forest law enforcement. From an original
commitment of P455,00.00, it has added P350,000.00 more. The
municipality, with the DENR and the community has embarked on a
massive and aggressive anti-illegal logging campaign, resulting in the
confiscation of logs totaling more than 33,000 board ft. It has banned
logging trucks and closed a wood processing plant believed to be buying
illegal cut logs. For its part, the ARMMDENR has put up a CENRO office
in Wao.

At the LGU side, there was established a Municipal Environment and
Natural Resources Office (MENRO), and created a MENR Council to
provide policy directions in natural resources management.

Today, forest management and forest law enforcement are joint
endeavors of the DENR, the local government and the community.


WILDLIFE PROTECTION



I. THE PHILIPPINES AS A MEGADIVERSE
COUNTRY AND HOTSPOT AREA

As stated, the Philippines is one of the 18 mega diverse countries in the
world.

According to experts, the number of species in a country is one measure
of biodiversity. The Philippines has 204 species of mammals, of which
54% or 111 species are found nowhere else; 101 species of amphibians,
78% of which is endemic; 258 species of reptiles with 66% endemism;
and 576 species of birds with 34% or 195 endemic species (PBCP,
2002). On wild flora, the country has about 14,000 species representing
five percent of the worlds flora. These include more than 8,000 species of
flowering plants or angiosperms, 33 species of gymnosperms, 1,100
species of pteridophytes, and 1,271 species of bryophytes (PPCSAP, in
prep). There are many more species that remain unknown to science
(Heaney et.al., 1997; Heaney & Regalado, 1998; Brown et. al., 1999). Per
hectare, the Philippines probably harbors more diversity of life than any
other country on Earth (Heaney as cited in the PBCP, 2002). Because of
the remarkable diversity in Philippine biological resources, the country is
considered as one of the 18 megadiversity
1
countries in the world. The
megadiverse countries together contain 70 to 80% of global biodiversity
(Mittermeier et.al., 1997, 1999; Myers et.al., 2000, as cited in the PBCP,
2002). (Cited in J osie de Leons Masteral Paper at DAP, 2006).

Unfortunately however, with the loss of the countrys forest cover, the
habitat of wild fauna has likewise been lost. Habitat destruction can be
attributed to logging, both legal and illegal, mining and energy projects,
land use conversion, kaingin, pest and diseases, etc. According to the
IUCN, the Philippines continue to face biodiversity crisis unparalled in
magnitude. The Philippines thus is considered as a biodiversity hotspot.

While habitat destruction is considered as the reason for wildlife loss,
other factors include weak institutional and legal mechanisms,
domestication and hybridization, introduction of exotic species, and over-
exploitation for food and trade (NBSAP, 1997).


II. LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR
WILDLIFE PROTECTION

A. CONSTITUTION: STATE OWNERSHIP OF WILDLIFE
RESOURCES

As with forest lands, wildlife resources are also owned by the State. As
wildlife is essential to preserve biological diversity, the State is also duty
bound to protect our countrys wildlife resources.

B. NATIONAL LAWS PROTECTING WILDLIFE

Among the national laws that protect our wildlife resources include:

PD 705 (1975) otherwise known as the Revised Forestry Code of
the Philippines which mandates the protection of forest lands,
including the conservation of wildlife and regulating the hunting
thereof;

PD 1152 of the Philippine Environment Code of 1977 which
mandates the DENR to establish a system of national exploitation
and conservation of wildlife resources and to encourage citizens
participation in the maintenance and/or enhancement of their
continuous productivity by: regulating the marketing of threatened
wildlife resources, reviewing all existing rules and regulations on
the exploitation of wildlife resources, and conserving the
threatened species of wild fauna;

Republic Act (RA) 8485 or the Animal Welfare Act of 1998 which
intends to protect and promote the welfare of all animals in the
Philippines by regulating the establishment and operations of all
facilities utilized for breeding, maintaining, keeping, treating, or
training of all animals either as objects of trade or as household
pets;

RA 7160 or the Local Government Code which mandates local
government units to share with the national government the
responsibility in the maintenance of ecological balance within their
territorial jurisdictions; and


RA 7586 of the National Integrated Protected Areas System of
1992 which established protected areas for the protection of
biological diversity.

C. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND AGREEMENTS

At the international level, the Philippines is a member of ASEAN which is
advocating biodiversity conservation and wildlife protection through the
ASEAN Working Group on Nature Conservation and Biodiversity
(AWGNCB), and the ASEAN Regional Center for Biodiversity
Conservation.

Also, the Philippines is a signatory to the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in 1981.
This treaty aims to regulate the international trade of wildlife species, its
parts and by-products. It sets international policies on trade of wildlife
which include the issuance of CITES Export, Import or Re-export Permit
for species listed under CITES Appendices. It prohibits the trade of
CITES species unless the individuals for trade are bred in captivity in
CITES-registered facilities. The treaty requires member-countries to
designate CITES Management and Scientific Authorities that will ensure
the strict implementation of CITES regulations.

The Philippines also ratified its membership in two other international
conventions: the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the
Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species (CMS). The
member-countries to the CBD are obliged, among others, to conserve
sites noted for rich biological diversity, develop national framework on
biodiversity conservation and ensure that any use of biodiversity is
sustainable and equitable (CBD Text, PAWB). The CMS, on the other
hand, requires member-countries to, among others, adopt strict protection
measures for migratory species, especially those categorized as being in
danger of extinction, and their habitats. (Cited in paper of J osie De Leon,
DAP).


III. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
IN THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF RA 9147

The DENR is the primary government agency responsible for terrestrial
wildlife protection. The office in the DENR is the Parks and Wildlife
Bureau. The Department of Agriculture on the other hand as represented
by the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources is the agency
responsible for declared aquatic critical habitats, all aquatic resources
and all marine mammals except Dugong.

For the province of Palawan however, both for terrestrial and aquatic, it is
the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development.

A. RECENT INITIATIVES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
RA 9147

Since its passage in 2001, the following have been done by government
towards wildlife protection:

1) Issuance of the IRR for Ra 9147

2) Issuance of DAO 2004-15 establishing the national list of
threatened wild fauna species and other wildlife species

3) Issuance of DAO 2004-60 requiring registration of endemic and
exotic species in possession of private individuals, rescue centers,
pet shops and zoological gardens

4) Preparation of a National Biodiversity and Strategy Action Plan
and Philippine Biodiversity Conservation Priorities

5) Partnerships with some LGUs and Private Sector on wildlife
protection such as in Bicol National Park, Inter-Agency Wildlife
Management Committee on Animal Welfare and MOA between
the City of Manila and the DENR


V. ISSUES AND CONCERNS IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF RA 9147

RA 9147 is a good law insofar as it provides for the legal arsenal for
wildlife protection. However, there are issues hindering its effective
implementation. These can be classified into educational issues or those
that relate to information and education campaigns, engineering or those
that relate to infrastructure and enforcement or those that relate to
actually apply the law.

A. EDUCATION

Lack of information materials regarding RA 9147 such as what
are the ban species for trading, and what are the prohibited
acts.

Lack of technical expertise in the DENR, Wildlife Enforcement
Officers and LGUs in the proper identification of wildlife and in
paralegal.

If the officers tasked to apprehend illegal wildlife peddlers do
not know how to identify a particular wildlife, then wildlife law
enforcement will have little chance of success.

B. ENGINEERING

Lack of wildlife rescue centers

Lack of wildlife traffic monitoring units

At present, only the airports of Davao, Zamboanga, Manila,
Cebu and Subic have monitoring units, while only the port of
Manila has a monitoring unit.


C. ENFORCEMENT

Lack of resources for wildlife protection

In fact, there is no separate budget allocation as yet in the
General Appropriations Act for wildlife protection.

Absence or lack of institutional arrangements with other
countries to combat entry and exit or wildlife and / or exotic
wildlife species.

Lack of checkpoints / monitoring units at airports and ports

Harassment against those who enforce the Wildlife Act


VI. RECOMMENDATIONS TO STRENGTHEN
WILDLIFE PROTECTION

Among the recommendations to strengthen wildlife protection are:

Comprehensive IEC program

Capacity building for DENR, DA, PCSD, LGU and police agencies
on the law on wildlife protection

Set up programs to protect those who protect wildlife

Set up monitoring checkpoints and units in all air and seaports

Set up wildlife rescue centers

Establish partnerships for stakeholders participation in wildlife law
enforcement, particularly with the LGUs

Establish institutional arrangements with other countries to combat
illegal entry and exit of wildlife

REFERENCES

DENR, 2003 Statistics

CBFM Guidelines

IFMA Guidelines

Local Government Code of 1991 (RA 7160)

Philippine Constitution

PD 705

RA 9147

RA 7586

RA 7160

De Leon, J osie: ______________ Masteral Thesis in DAP


Phil - Forest and Wildlife Development

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phil - Forest and Wildlife Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ph|L|PP|NE ENV|R0NHENTAL C0VERNAN6E 2 PR0JE6T (E60C0V 2}

Philippine Forest and Wildlife Law Enforcement

You might also like